Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 - PubMed (original) (raw)

. 2024 Aug;33(8):2029-2046.

doi: 10.1007/s11136-024-03634-y. Epub 2024 Jul 9.

Lidwine B Mokkink 2, Caroline B Terwee 2, Dorcas Beaton 3, Joel J Gagnier 4, Andrea C Tricco 5 6 7, Ami Baba 1, Nancy J Butcher 1 8, Maureen Smith 9, Catherine Hofstetter 10, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi 11, Anna Berardi 12 13, Julie Farmer 14, Kirstie L Haywood 15, Karolin R Krause 16, Sarah Markham 17, Evan Mayo-Wilson 18, Ava Mehdipour 19, Juanna Ricketts # 20, Peter Szatmari 16, Zahi Touma 21, David Moher 22, Martin Offringa 23 24

Affiliations

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

Ellen B M Elsman et al. Qual Life Res. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

Methods: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.

Results: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.

Conclusion: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Keywords: COSMIN; Measurement properties; Outcome measurement instrument; PRISMA; Reporting guideline; Systematic reviews.

© 2024. The Author(s).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Drs. Terwee and Mokkink are the founders of COSMIN; Dr. Moher is a member of the PRISMA executive; Dr. Tricco is the co-editor in chief of the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. The other authors have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

Development process of PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. E&E explanation and elaboration; EQUATOR Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research; OMI outcome measurement instrument

Fig. 2

Fig. 2

Proposals and consensus for items in each Delphi round and the workgroup meeting. COSMIN COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments; OMI outcome measurement instrument; PRISMA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses

Fig. 3

Fig. 3

PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 flow diagram

Similar articles

References

    1. Butcher, N. J., Monsour, A., Mew, E. J., Chan, A.-W., Moher, D., Mayo-Wilson, E., Terwee, C. B., Chee-A-Tow, A., Baba, A., & Gavin, F. (2022). Guidelines for reporting outcomes in trial reports: The CONSORT-outcomes 2022 extension. JAMA,328(22), 2252–2264. - PubMed
    1. Prinsen, C. A., Mokkink, L. B., Bouter, L. M., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., De Vet, H. C., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research,27(5), 1147–1157. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Porter, M. E. (2010). What is value in health care. New England Journal of Medicine,363(26), 2477–2481. - PubMed
    1. Nelson, E. C., Eftimovska, E., Lind, C., Hager, A., Wasson, J. H., & Lindblad, S. (2015). Patient reported outcome measures in practice. BMJ. 10.1136/bmj.g7818 10.1136/bmj.g7818 - DOI - PubMed
    1. OMERACT. (2021). The OMERACT handbook for establishing and implementing core outcomes in clinical trials across the spectrum of rheumatologic conditions. OMERACT.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources